xXx..CK..xXx Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 34 minutes ago, Commandant said: I think I've been very clear on how much I like Matheson. On this board, I'm probably one of the biggest Matheson fans. That said I think you underestimate Dobson if you think he's a lateral move to Matheson. And I think you over value him if you don’t…. Or underestimate Matheson. Dobson has a .59 career points per game with the Islanders and Matheson has a .53 points per game average with the Habs. 44 points a year versus 48. Nothing to do with my initial comment, but big whoop. I can agree that Dobson is better, but if you know Dobson as well as you say you do, you should know that he has not been great defensively this year and has been accused of the exact same negative gaffes that people accuse Matheson of. People involved with the Islanders have not been happy with his defensive play this year. Admittedly, the same has been said about Matheson. If Dobson is rumored to be moved, there’s a reason now isn’t there? Anyway, the reason it’s a lateral move is not because of the specific players but again because it’s a top pairing defenseman for a top pairing defenseman. Maybe try trading Mailloux and then the rest of a package before including Matheson. Otherwise, forget the trade. Cozens is also a better player than Dach but it’s a lateral move in part because of where they play or would play in the lineup. This is all without getting into the reality that we already have Lane Hutson. He’s now our power play quarterback. More than a third of Dobson’s career points have been on the power play and almost half of Hutson’s have as well. Find me a team that plays two defensemen on their first unit power play… I’ll wait because it’s not easy. So we acquire Dobson and one of him or Hutson’s offensive stats take a hit, all the while neither of them are known for their defensive prowess. Seems like the right move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Dobson is right handed and there is a premium for that. Thats just facts of supply and demand. Hes also 5 years younger which fits better with the group and hes young enough where improvement is possible. Mattheson is in his prime. Hes hit his peak. Im not saying Mattheson will decline, Im just saying I dont see him improving more. Lastly Matheson has 1.5 years on his contract left. The assumption in trading for Dobson is we are signing him long term as part of the deal. That is part of my calculation too. As for Dobson's defense. I point to the stats card posted in this thread to do so As for PP... if Matheson is out, there is a spot on PP2. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreegking Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 1 hour ago, Commandant said: Dobson is right handed and there is a premium for that. Thats just facts of supply and demand. Hes also 5 years younger which fits better with the group and hes young enough where improvement is possible. Mattheson is in his prime. Hes hit his peak. Im not saying Mattheson will decline, Im just saying I dont see him improving more. Lastly Matheson has 1.5 years on his contract left. The assumption in trading for Dobson is we are signing him long term as part of the deal. That is part of my calculation too. As for Dobson's defense. I point to the stats card posted in this thread to do so As for PP... if Matheson is out, there is a spot on PP2. This. All of it. But it’s not going to happen anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreegking Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 2 hours ago, Commandant said: No, I don't think teams are giving 2nd and 3rd round picks for players who are "overpaid and deficits" ... which was your words. But they do. All the time. Thinking they can get more. Or that t completes a line if. Happens all the time. Look what Hughesngave for Dach and Newhook. I would never have. Fans loved it. I laughed. These guys are third liners. But gms believe in their coaches. Happens all the time. You do not know? you think a third or second rounder is special? It’s not much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 5 hours ago, dreegking said: Fans loved it. I laughed. I loved the trades, didnt know Dach at all but liked the effort at adding a young pro centre for a d-man. You wanted to keep Romanov? Or the pick they got for Romanov? Newhook had 15g in 55gms on a pretty weak team last year and only makes $2.9. Could be a 3rd liner, we shall see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xXx..CK..xXx Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 2 hours ago, DON said: I loved the trades, didnt know Dach at all but liked the effort at adding a young pro centre for a d-man. You wanted to keep Romanov? Or the pick they got for Romanov? Newhook had 15g in 55gms on a pretty weak team last year and only makes $2.9. Could be a 3rd liner, we shall see. I’m happy with having Dach and Newhook on the team. As for Dobson, it’s fun to debate potential acquisitions and rumours, that’s why we have these threads but the trade proposed is simply unrealistic. Dobson is not going to be traded if he is the best player involved like everyone claims he is and the Islanders are mainly looking for an elite forward who can score goals in return for him rather than a lateral move defensively for a left handed defenseman to boot, as well as a prospect and draft pick. I wouldn’t make the move from our end because of the elements we would have to add on top of sending a good player their way, as well as the fact that we have Hutson already, and the Islanders wouldn’t make it from their end because it’s simply not what they are looking for. To top it off, we’d have to expect that they would sign him to an 8 year contract extension (doesn’t have to be 8 but that’s generally the benefit of these types of deals - being able to sign for 8 vs 7) prior to the trade as well. It’s fine to dream but this trade won’t happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 1 hour ago, xXx..CK..xXx said: I’m happy with having Dach and Newhook on the team. As for Dobson, it’s fun to debate potential acquisitions and rumours, that’s why we have these threads but the trade proposed is simply unrealistic. Dobson is not going to be traded if he is the best player involved like everyone claims he is and the Islanders are mainly looking for an elite forward who can score goals in return for him rather than a lateral move defensively for a left handed defenseman to boot, as well as a prospect and draft pick. I wouldn’t make the move from our end because of the elements we would have to add on top of sending a good player their way, as well as the fact that we have Hutson already, and the Islanders wouldn’t make it from their end because it’s simply not what they are looking for. To top it off, we’d have to expect that they would sign him to an 8 year contract extension (doesn’t have to be 8 but that’s generally the benefit of these types of deals - being able to sign for 8 vs 7) prior to the trade as well. It’s fine to dream but this trade won’t happen. It is possible that Montreal use Matheson to acquire a scoring forward that they then flip for Dobson. Again, Matheson is the only high value player that we could live without. He isn’t being dumped. Habs could not afford to give up one of our top 6 forwards - unless NY values Newhook that way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xXx..CK..xXx Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Everything that is being stated is true if the Habs are REALLY in love with the idea of having Noah Dobson, which as I said doesn’t make much sense when we already have Lane Hutson. Let’s not forget that this rumour is coming from the Islanders end rather than the Habs. It’s not like the headlines are, “Habs are ready to go all-in on acquiring a top pairing right handed defenseman.” Rather it’s “New York Islanders are shopping Dobson after a subpar season by his standards, in order to acquire more firepower up front.” With that being said, Dobson is an RFA at the end of the season, so why not just throw out an offer sheet for him in the summer if we’re so interested, rather than losing an already capable player of Matheson’s level. If another team acquires him in the meantime, so be it. That type of thing happens all the time and would not constitute a reason to overpay for them. “Living without him” in regards to Matheson is completely subjective to which fan you’re talking to and there are plenty of other players we could technically live without. I like our players but again there are certain fans that say we could “live without” Slafkovský, Newhook, Dach, Laine, Gallagher, Evans, Armia, Dvorak, Anderson, Mailloux, Reinbacher etc. This is not to say all of those players would get a trade for Dobson done, or that all of them are high value players, but some of them do have a relatively high ceiling in terms of potential and fans have included them in trade proposals as well. This is not even getting into the fact that Matheson is a very capable veteran presence that helps the team in his own way. I won’t even go there because I know how the majority on here feel about him. If the Habs want to move the moon in order to acquire Dobson, sure it’s possible but as I stated the Islanders are looking for a forward that can help them now, so it would likely involve a three team trade like the Rantanen deal if we’re including Matheson. This is indeed possible but my response has always been to the proposed trade of Matheson, Beck and a 1st. There are other trade proposals out there and a world where I would love to have Dobson on our team as well, despite the reality that one of he or Hutson will be impacted offensively, which is their strength, just as Matheson has been this year due to him now being on the second power play unit rather than the first. In the modern NHL, the 1st power play unit gets a lot of run time when compared with the 2nd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 1 hour ago, Prime Minister Koivu said: It is possible that Montreal use Matheson to acquire a scoring forward that they then flip for Dobson. Again, Matheson is the only high value player that we could live without. He isn’t being dumped. Habs could not afford to give up one of our top 6 forwards - unless NY values Newhook that way Why not Caufield, obviously not preferred to do and i am not sure how good Dobson is, but is an option? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Having Hutson is NOT a reason to not acquire a two-way RHD with size. Thats a stupid reason when you need 6 Dmen to play a game. In fact a future D would likely see them play together. Hutson - Dobson Guhle - Reinbacher Xhekaj -Maillioux Is just one potential configuration Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Why not throw out an Offer Sheet? Cause you are risking twi very high pick in that scenario. Would you trade two first rounders (with one or more in top 10), a second, and a third for Mattheson? Come on now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xXx..CK..xXx Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 It’s easy to portray a false picture, but unfortunately I do my research prior to posting. Are the Habs going to get better or worse? Sure, there’s a possibility the pick is high but it is not as black and white as you make it out to be. Perhaps the picks won’t be as high. Furthermore, Dobson is just as much of a two way defenseman as Hutson and Matheson are, in that offense is their strength. You can praise Dobson’s defense all you want but the fact remains that the Islanders organization as well as people involved with their team haven’t been happy with plays he makes in the defensive area. I defend Matheson for the exact same reason because I believe offensive defensemen who are willing to make plays are going to turnover the puck from time to time. With that being said, Hutson should be paired with a player who is more defensively sound. As I’ve said numerous times at least one of Dobson or Hutson will be impacted offensively because of a lack of power play time, so you’re making a trade that will regress one of two players on our team. It happened to Matheson this year, and it would happen to one of them. Outside of that I agree, the more talent the merrier, which is why I am advocating for keeping Matheson in the first place, and would even enjoy having all three. Finally, let’s just completely overlook the topic of the Islanders wanting a forward because “me want Dobson now!” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 1 hour ago, DON said: Why not Caufield, obviously not preferred to do and i am not sure how good Dobson is, but is an option? If we traded Caufield then we would need to replace his production and I think Montreal is already thin on top 6 forwards. Demidov will hopefully greatly add to our offence soon. 3 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said: It’s easy to portray a false picture, but unfortunately I do my research prior to posting. Are the Habs going to get better or worse? Sure, there’s a possibility the pick is high but it is not as black and white as you make it out to be. Perhaps the picks won’t be as high. Furthermore, Dobson is just as much of a two way defenseman as Hutson and Matheson are, in that offense is their strength. You can praise Dobson’s defense all you want but the fact remains that the Islanders organization as well as people involved with their team haven’t been happy with plays he makes in the defensive area. I defend Matheson for the exact same reason because I believe offensive defensemen who are willing to make plays are going to turnover the puck from time to time. With that being said, Hutson should be paired with a player who is more defensively sound. As I’ve said numerous times at least one of Dobson or Hutson will be impacted offensively because of a lack of power play time, so you’re making a trade that will regress one of two players on our team. It happened to Matheson this year, and it would happen to one of them. Outside of that I agree, the more talent the merrier, which is why I am advocating for keeping Matheson in the first place, and would even enjoy having all three. Finally, let’s just completely overlook the topic of the Islanders wanting a forward because “me want Dobson now!” I get your argument and this whole Dobson thing is probably fantasy anyway. However if there is an opportunity to get Dobson then we should be interested. Maybe Dach entices NY? Then we can look at trading for a second line centre - by using Matheson as bait! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Non playoff teams cant just assume that they will be outside the top 10 when risking future draft picks. Thats how the Leafs gave Seguin to Boston, how San Jose gave a top 5 pick to Ottawa, how Colorado got a top 5 pick from Ottawa, etc... etc... But sure lets risk 2 of them instead of Mattheson Weve already seen that this team is not deep. What happens if we have one injury to Suzuki? Hutson? Caufield? Instead of Heineman or Guhle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Trading Caufield for Dobson is unappealing. Normally I’d advocate trading a W for a D, but then all we do is create a big hole up front after getting rid of a pure goal-scorer who seems to love Montreal, is great pals with out captain, and is locked up long-term. (I also get a bit nervous that Dobson has one monster season that looks, statistically, like an outlier. Guys like that tend to be overvalued). Now you can say that Demidov will make Caufield redundant; but that is highly premature IMHO. And for that matter, you can say that Reinbacher will make Dobson redundant - right? After all, we used a #5 overall pick to get him…if the team moves a core piece to get Dobson, that looks like a flashing red indicating that they no longer believe in Reinbacher. Unless you really think DR is a flop, it’s far better to just stay the course. The unfortunate thing is that, if Patrick Laine were playing well rather than looking like Waldo out there, THEN we might have a scoring piece to tantalize the Isles. Oh well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanes World Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Caufield is just as excited if a teammate scores a goal as to him self. Radulov was like that too. intangibles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xXx..CK..xXx Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 22 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said: Trading Caufield for Dobson is unappealing. Normally I’d advocate trading a W for a D, but then all we do is create a big hole up front after getting rid of a pure goal-scorer who seems to love Montreal, is great pals with out captain, and is locked up long-term. (I also get a bit nervous that Dobson has one monster season that looks, statistically, like an outlier. Guys like that tend to be overvalued). Now you can say that Demidov will make Caufield redundant; but that is highly premature IMHO. And for that matter, you can say that Reinbacher will make Dobson redundant - right? After all, we used a #5 overall pick to get him…if the team moves a core piece to get Dobson, that looks like a flashing red indicating that they no longer believe in Reinbacher. Unless you really think DR is a flop, it’s far better to just stay the course. The unfortunate thing is that, if Patrick Laine were playing well rather than looking like Waldo out there, THEN we might have a scoring piece to tantalize the Isles. Oh well. I agree. Out of the forward players that I listed, Laine is the one who stands out as the prototypical goal scorer that the Islanders would be looking for. Unfortunately in the immediate future, he lacks solid output on 5 on 5 play and he may not be enticing to the Islanders in the present. You never know though. If we do keep Laine, I still have hope for him to be honest. I can’t say that I ever expect him to be a Gallagher in terms of effort, but he certainly has it in him to be a great goal scorer and point producer for our team. I also agree when it comes to Reinbacher and even Mailloux when it comes to having some upside on our RD in the near future. Out of everyone being discussed, including Matheson and Dobson, Reinbacher is the highest draft pick. I’m not ready to prematurely anoint Reinbacher into the role because we need to see more of him but something like Hutson - Reinbacher Matheson - Carrier Guhle - Mailloux is also quite a solid defensive corps… I think a lot of the players could be interchanged as well so hopefully I don’t get crucified for having the specific lineup listed. If we need a veteran on the first pair then put Carrier there until one of Reinbacher or Mailloux step up. Either that or Matheson - Carrier are your top pair until the rookies prove themselves. I am also aware that Guhle is more than a 3rd pairing defenseman but as I said, place the pairings wherever you want, or even mix it up a little. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 3 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said: I agree. Out of the forward players that I listed, Laine is the one who stands out as the prototypical goal scorer that the Islanders would be looking for. Unfortunately in the immediate future, he lacks solid output on 5 on 5 play and he may not be enticing to the Islanders in the present. You never know though. If we do keep Laine, I still have hope for him to be honest. I can’t say that I ever expect him to be a Gallagher in terms of effort, but he certainly has it in him to be a great goal scorer and point producer for our team. I also agree when it comes to Reinbacher and even Mailloux when it comes to having some upside on our RD in the near future. Out of everyone being discussed, including Matheson and Dobson, Reinbacher is the highest draft pick. I’m not ready to prematurely anoint Reinbacher into the role because we need to see more of him but something like Hutson - Reinbacher Matheson - Carrier Guhle - Mailloux is also quite a solid defensive corps… I think a lot of the players could be interchanged as well so hopefully I don’t get crucified for having the specific lineup listed. If we need a veteran on the first pair then put Carrier there until one of Reinbacher or Mailloux step up. Either that or Matheson - Carrier are your top pair until the rookies prove themselves. Good post, but what is the time-frame for the D corps you sketch above? I personally don’t see us re-signing Mattheson as a core piece when his contract expires and he’s turning 32, unless we get him on a team-friendly contract. But perhaps I’m mistaken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xXx..CK..xXx Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said: Good post, but what is the time-frame for the D corps you sketch above? I personally don’t see us re-signing Mattheson as a core piece when his contract expires and he’s turning 32, unless we get him on a team-friendly contract. But perhaps I’m mistaken. I think the D corps above could come in to fruition next year. I’m not 100% on Reinbacher automatically being a top pairing player game #1 of his NHL career but I do think he can compliment Hutson well so perhaps they start as a second pair and then things work themselves out. The pairings I proposed could develop as next year progresses. As I also said, those 6 players could be played in a myriad of different combinations as it’s a really solid group on paper. It’s almost like having a 1a) 1b) and 1c) defensive pairing. Not because they are all top pairing quality individually but because the pairings would be so equal and have players who are capable of being top pair and playing heavy minutes on each combination. Mailloux was drafted in 2021 and played his first NHL game in 2023 so I see no reason why Reinbacher wouldn’t be able to play next year having been drafted in 2023 and it being 2025 next year. Furthermore, the top 4 picks of Reinbacher’s draft are all regulars in the NHL, as well as Michkov at 7th overall. Admittedly, they are all forwards though, and Mailloux only played a few games in 2023. With that being said, unless something is amiss, Reinbacher should be playing for the Habs next year. Beyond next season, I am not adamant that we must keep Matheson and if we are out of the playoff picture next year (hopefully not) we may even trade him as a rental. Like you said though, if there was a team friendly extension on the table, I personally wouldn’t be opposed to keeping him. Regression is a real thing, no doubt, I completely agree, but players are playing well longer than ever in sports, even up until 40 so generally speaking (to the world as a whole) people aren’t over the hill at 30 anymore. In many cases, when a player is innately good, they still have a minimum of 5 years of solid play left in them, and I’m being generous because it’s even more now. Of course it does depend as players like Subban no longer play. Not everyone is a Crosby and Ovechkin but the point is even Crosby and Ovechkin would be done statistically if the year were 2000 (randomly chosen year) which is both a good example and a bad example because Jagr still plays but he also retired from the NHL at 36. Forsberg led the league in 2002, retired at 34 (almost 35) and then 37 (almost 36) (played 2 games). Lemieux led the league in ‘97 and retired at 38 and came back for a quarter season at 40. The point is that all of them weren’t successful near the end of their careers. Ovechkin and Crosby are still delivering over 1 point per game at 37 and 39 respectively. I apologize for the tangent, I was just assuming the main reason that Matheson wouldn’t be resigned would be because of his age, and I just see him maintaining his mobility for a few more years. He just doesn’t seem to be getting any slower. I don’t want to get into a debate because I know about your worry as players get older and I do agree that it’s a possibility that I’m wrong about Matheson and he loses his step by 33. I really don’t see it happening though. He’s actually a late bloomer if anything. The answer to your question though is that my proposed corps is for next year only. I perfectly see the possibility of a world where Matheson is no longer with us after next year based on his contract expiring after next season. I don’t see a rush to make any big changes though because if Mailloux and Reinbacher do prove to be able to compete at the NHL level, our defensive corps should be fine even without him after next year, and who knows who else we add by then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted February 8 Author Share Posted February 8 7 hours ago, xXx..CK..xXx said: Let’s not forget that this rumour is coming from the Islanders end rather than the Habs. It’s not like the headlines are, “Habs are ready to go all-in on acquiring a top pairing right handed defenseman.” Rather it’s “New York Islanders are shopping Dobson after a subpar season by his standards, in order to acquire more firepower up front.” Let's not forget that the Islanders never leak anything and have a GM known to kill prospective deals if something leaks out. This report didn't come from them, it came from a Russian website staffed by a bunch of writers who are known for less than stellar records when it comes to accuracy regarding trade rumours. Out of all the nonsense they've posted from a rumour perspective this season, that site has a whopping one correct (and it wasn't on a trade rumour even but rather something CBA-related). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 5 hours ago, xXx..CK..xXx said: I agree. Out of the forward players that I listed, Laine is the one who stands out as the prototypical goal scorer that the Islanders would be looking for. Unfortunately in the immediate future, he lacks solid output on 5 on 5 play and he may not be enticing to the Islanders in the present. You never know though. If we do keep Laine, I still have hope for him to be honest. I can’t say that I ever expect him to be a Gallagher in terms of effort, but he certainly has it in him to be a great goal scorer and point producer for our team. I also agree when it comes to Reinbacher and even Mailloux when it comes to having some upside on our RD in the near future. Out of everyone being discussed, including Matheson and Dobson, Reinbacher is the highest draft pick. I’m not ready to prematurely anoint Reinbacher into the role because we need to see more of him but something like Hutson - Reinbacher Matheson - Carrier Guhle - Mailloux is also quite a solid defensive corps… I think a lot of the players could be interchanged as well so hopefully I don’t get crucified for having the specific lineup listed. If we need a veteran on the first pair then put Carrier there until one of Reinbacher or Mailloux step up. Either that or Matheson - Carrier are your top pair until the rookies prove themselves. I am also aware that Guhle is more than a 3rd pairing defenseman but as I said, place the pairings wherever you want, or even mix it up a little. I’d do Laine at (40% retention +Matheson) for Dobson + 2nd i don’t want to go into next year hoping Reinbacher will be ready to be a top 4 RD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GNick Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 I'm not the most knowledgeable on Dobson. But sounds like it will take a core player then pay him a ton of money. He's not having great year. I would probably keep Caufield. But I would offer Dach and Matheson. Doubt its enough thou. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 15 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said: i don’t want to go into next year hoping Reinbacher will be ready to be a top 4 RD. Top 4? Will likely spend time in Laval to start but should see how he looks in a month or so and Laval seems a lock for the playoffs and fingers-crossed they can have a long run into late May. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 3 hours ago, DON said: Top 4? Will likely spend time in Laval to start but should see how he looks in a month or so and Laval seems a lock for the playoffs and fingers-crossed they can have a long run into late May. I think he will be in Laval - or at least should be in Laval. The only reason or excuse for HuGo not picking up legit top 4 RD, is if THEY expect him to be in the top 4. Which would be a like Bergevin feeling that Mete can step in to be top or 2nd pairing guy as a rookie. We have to stop putting young players in their wrong side, and need to shore up the RD with legit NHL ready RD. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomh009 Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 1 hour ago, hab29RETIRED said: The only reason or excuse for HuGo not picking up legit top 4 RD, is if THEY expect him to be in the top 4. Which would be a like Bergevin feeling that Mete can step in to be top or 2nd pairing guy as a rookie. They expect him to be in top four, yes. Not next year, but he is expected to be a long-term top-four RD. Gorton's and Hughes's plan is to contend for the Cup, not to focus on the next season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.